Promaster Dealbreaker thread over at the Sprinter Forum
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
Let the ProMaster bashing begin, except this guy quote below from "psychoboy"
As for the huge wheel wells ,Think real real hard and no they are not for bigger
tires.
"Quote" I measured the axle's clearance on the 1500 down the street at 7.5"....so it's 1 inch lower than the bottom of the sprinter pumpkin. not enough to matter to nearly anyone.
the oil pan is just over 9" from the ground, the exhaust downtube is about 8.5"...same clearance as our 2500 sprinter
remember guys....this is a cargo/delivery van. not a off road vehicle, not a rock crawler. they wanted a low floor and dependable weight capacity....this is how you get a low floor and good weight capacity. look at every non-big rig flat bed trailer, boat trailer, or camper trailer on the road. this van is little more than an engine with a seat and a box trailer welded to it.
there are probably very good reasons to not want a promaster, having unfounded concerns about that does not exist are not those reasons.
These vans, in this configuration, are old in europe by this point. if the ground clearances were an issue, i'm sure the motorways over there would be littered in wheel-less metal boxes.
as for the K-car reference.....K-cars had coil sprung trailing beams, this is a leaf sprung drop axle. aside from them both being un-powered live axles (ie: not IRS)..they don't have much in common.
on the other hand, it's a vehicle with a McPherson front and a non-IRS rear......just like almost every FWD car built by an american car company in the 80s and early 90s. "unquote"
__________________
BEV the Big Effin' Van
As for the huge wheel wells ,Think real real hard and no they are not for bigger
tires.
"Quote" I measured the axle's clearance on the 1500 down the street at 7.5"....so it's 1 inch lower than the bottom of the sprinter pumpkin. not enough to matter to nearly anyone.
the oil pan is just over 9" from the ground, the exhaust downtube is about 8.5"...same clearance as our 2500 sprinter
remember guys....this is a cargo/delivery van. not a off road vehicle, not a rock crawler. they wanted a low floor and dependable weight capacity....this is how you get a low floor and good weight capacity. look at every non-big rig flat bed trailer, boat trailer, or camper trailer on the road. this van is little more than an engine with a seat and a box trailer welded to it.
there are probably very good reasons to not want a promaster, having unfounded concerns about that does not exist are not those reasons.
These vans, in this configuration, are old in europe by this point. if the ground clearances were an issue, i'm sure the motorways over there would be littered in wheel-less metal boxes.
as for the K-car reference.....K-cars had coil sprung trailing beams, this is a leaf sprung drop axle. aside from them both being un-powered live axles (ie: not IRS)..they don't have much in common.
on the other hand, it's a vehicle with a McPherson front and a non-IRS rear......just like almost every FWD car built by an american car company in the 80s and early 90s. "unquote"
__________________
BEV the Big Effin' Van
The PM rear-axle drop does seem excessive when van is empty, but it's probably required to provide enough rear suspension travel when van is fully loaded. Jacking the rear up for greater ground clearance could be as simple as installing bigger tires or a rear axle with less drop. It shouldn't be too diffult to fabricate one, but why? These vans are not made to go off road.
For what it's worth, the new RWD Transit will use much smaller diameter tires than the present Econoline, so the rear differential pumpkin probably won't be much higher off the road. And when equipped with dual rear wheels, tire diameter is even smaller; thereby providing even less ground clearance.
For what it's worth, the new RWD Transit will use much smaller diameter tires than the present Econoline, so the rear differential pumpkin probably won't be much higher off the road. And when equipped with dual rear wheels, tire diameter is even smaller; thereby providing even less ground clearance.
Been following this thread over on the Sprinter forum. Never fails to amaze me how many "know it alls" try to sway folks because it's something they think and could not possibly know.
Again, it's that 3 pointed star being something special mentality showing. I try to share my knowledge and opinions of things I've actually had a hands on with and have experienced myself.
Now to get off my rant........
Again, it's that 3 pointed star being something special mentality showing. I try to share my knowledge and opinions of things I've actually had a hands on with and have experienced myself.
Now to get off my rant........
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
Post #18 from surlyoldbill
It's a wacky design, you'd think they would flip it and hang the leaf springs instead of stack them on top. Maybe that will be an aftermarket kit.
Like selling Ice-cream to an Eskimo in the middle of January.
As for the big wheel wells.
Drop the floor in a Sprinter or a Transit 6 inches and all of a sudden the wheel wells
are huge.
Yes we make mistakes once and awhile when we post , but what the heck?
Do some research first and maybe some people can be taken seriously.
Afraid of change.
It's a wacky design, you'd think they would flip it and hang the leaf springs instead of stack them on top. Maybe that will be an aftermarket kit.
Like selling Ice-cream to an Eskimo in the middle of January.
As for the big wheel wells.
Drop the floor in a Sprinter or a Transit 6 inches and all of a sudden the wheel wells
are huge.
Yes we make mistakes once and awhile when we post , but what the heck?
Do some research first and maybe some people can be taken seriously.
Afraid of change.
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
Joined
·
654 Posts
Too much ignorance on that thread over there, you can't even begin to debate some of those assumptions, its like arguing with a pig - you will get muddied
Joined
·
23 Posts
Uncubed, you just doubled the maintenance costs on that van.
LOL
The whole point of a dropped axle is to increase the space above it ... And they're worried about ground clearance! Personally, 8-ish inches of ground clearance to the axle is plenty. I don't think I've ever owned a vehicle with that much ground clearance. My current vehicle certainly doesn't have it, and it's not a problem!
The whole point of a dropped axle is to increase the space above it ... And they're worried about ground clearance! Personally, 8-ish inches of ground clearance to the axle is plenty. I don't think I've ever owned a vehicle with that much ground clearance. My current vehicle certainly doesn't have it, and it's not a problem!
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
LOL! Now I will be excepted in the club, and I am going over there
to join (not)
" Pass me the Grey Poupon "
Material things make a person higher up the ladder (In there minds)
Not all Sprinter owners are like this, so I am sorry if I offend anyone.
I'm a Sprinter "owner" (and a very satisfied one at that) and not in the least offended. It's the "fans" you need to be wary of. I guess that makes me a hypocrite though. I go on and on about how daft it is to care what badge they glue on a vehicle, and here I haven't been able to pull the trigger on a PM because I wouldn't trust Chrysler to build a proper toaster, let alone a motor vehicle.
Joined
·
727 Posts
That topic got me worried for a while, since I occasionally drive on rough roads.
Never paid attention to that rear bar that sets the ground clearance to 6.9". So I checked the clearance on my current minivan (Chevrolet Uplander) that was high enough for my needs : 6.7". It's all good.
I also checked the ground clearance for the Sprinter from this reference:
http://buyersguide.caranddriver.com/mercedes-benz/sprinter/2012/mercedes-benz-sprinter/specs/338853
Ground Clearance Front: 9.5 in
Ground Clearance Rear: 6.9 in
So, unless "Car and Driver" is wrong, a 0.2 inch difference is not significant.
But hey, owning a Mercedes-Benz may make some people look at the world from an higher point of view.
Never paid attention to that rear bar that sets the ground clearance to 6.9". So I checked the clearance on my current minivan (Chevrolet Uplander) that was high enough for my needs : 6.7". It's all good.
I also checked the ground clearance for the Sprinter from this reference:
http://buyersguide.caranddriver.com/mercedes-benz/sprinter/2012/mercedes-benz-sprinter/specs/338853
Ground Clearance Front: 9.5 in
Ground Clearance Rear: 6.9 in
So, unless "Car and Driver" is wrong, a 0.2 inch difference is not significant.
But hey, owning a Mercedes-Benz may make some people look at the world from an higher point of view.
It's hilarious. There are people on the Sprinter forum who are literally ill at the thought someone would tamper with the ECU "tune," since it must be perfect otherwise why would MBZ have sold it like that. In Europe MBZ is like GM only less reliable (if that's possible), and here they have managed to convince the public they're something special.
Enormous amount of ignorant energy because there may be another vehicle at least as good as their vehicle. (I hang out on bike forums a lot too and the HD vs BMW vs ALL Japanese vs etc. is not different, people just have to show how "smart and superior" they are while spewing stupidity and illogic). I seriously looked at the Sprinter before pulling the trigger on a van that I had never seen in person yet (because I pre-ordered before they first ones were out) ... it was tough, I was really wanting a Sprinter but considered all of the angels. So far I have not regretted it, I think I got a great vehicle that works very well for what I bought it for ... and 50 years of MOPAR ownership made me take the risk.
Thus, don't give a **** what they think.
Thus, don't give a **** what they think.
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
Thank you Sprinter member psychoboy for setting it straight.
post number 45
http://sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31443&page=5
post number 45
http://sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31443&page=5
If someone wanted extra rear-axle ground clearance for light off-roading, they could either adapt an independent rear suspension or they could section the frame rails for greater clearance. That would allow a straighter axle without as much drop. A custom vehicle fabricator could do it easily.
Many RWD trucks have the frame rails curved slightly to make extra room for axle clearance. The same for PM would work but unitized chassis curve and reinforcement would have to be above floor. For personal use like RV that's not a big deal, but as a work truck to haul pallets it would get in way. I'm sure that's why Fiat kept frame rails straight. That and lower cost of making it simpler. But I'm sure it can be modified with enough cash if it's important to owner.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!